Max Junestrand

And it basically outlined that we were going to do three things, but we were going to do those three things so well that our suite was the best basket money could buy.

And it was our agent, our assistant, our tabular review, and our word add-in.

And we were competing with local products for these different things.

Like the word add-in was competing with a bunch of other legal tech companies that were only focused on the word add-in.

Our tabular review was competing with, at the time, like Hebbia and companies who were only focused on tabular review or the matrix, I think they call it.

And then we had our agent.

But we said, if we have all of these three things and we combine them in a very user-friendly way, that suite is going to be better than buying all of these three things separately.

And that's kind of the platform play or the suite play.

That was totally the right move.

So we removed five or six other things that we were building, just deleted the code, and then we hard committed on these things.

The reason why I don't think it's an Uber and Lyft is because in Uber and Lyft, there was no product differentiation.

The products were pretty much the same.

It's strategy differentiation on global versus global.

Yeah, but it was very hard to build something different.

Uber, for what it's worth, I mean, the product looks the same today, basically.

With the addition of bells and whistles, but it's the same fundamental thing.

But the difference to our story is that the product differentiation really matters.

And the amount of things that you can go and build is so vast.

It's like this universe of legal technology that just has never been built.

Because one of my theories is that maybe in legal tech before generative AI, there weren't that many exciting things to build.